nmm 22 4500ICPSR03688MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2003 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR03688MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 2001
[electronic resource]
United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice
2006-03-30Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2003ICPSR3688NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The goal of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM)
Program is to determine the extent and correlates of illicit drug use
in the population of booked arrestees in local areas. Data were
collected in 2001 at four separate times (quarterly) during the year
in 33 metropolitan areas in the United States. The ADAM program
adopted a new instrument in 2000 in adult booking facilities for male
(Part 1) and female (Part 2) arrestees. Data from arrestees in
juvenile detention facilities (Part 3) continued to use the juvenile
instrument from previous years, extending back through the DRUG USE
FORECASTING series (ICPSR 9477). The ADAM program in 2001 also
continued the use of probability-based sampling for male arrestees in
adult facilities, which was initiated in 2000. Therefore, the male
adult sample includes weights, generated through post-sampling
stratification of the data. For the adult files, variables fell into
one of eight categories: (1) demographic data on each arrestee, (2)
ADAM facesheet (records-based) data, (3) data on disposition of the
case, including accession to a verbal consent script, (4) calendar of
admissions to substance abuse and mental health treatment programs,
(5) data on alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence (6) drug
acquisition data covering the five most commonly used illicit drugs,
(7) urine test results, and (8) weights. The juvenile file contains
demographic variables and arrestee's self-reported past and continued
use of 15 drugs, as well as other drug-related behaviors.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03688.v1
ADAM/DUF Programicpsralcohol abuseicpsrarrestsicpsrcrime patternsicpsrdemographic characteristicsicpsrdrug dependenceicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug related crimesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug treatmenticpsrdrug useicpsrdrugsicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrtrendsicpsrurinalysisicpsrNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramUnited States Department of Justice. National Institute of JusticeInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)3688Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03688.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR03815MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2004 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR03815MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 2002
[electronic resource]
United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice
2006-03-30Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2004ICPSR3815NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The goal of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program
is to determine the extent and correlates of illicit drug use in the
population of booked arrestees in local areas. Data were collected in
2002 at four separate times (quarterly) during the year in 36
metropolitan areas in the United States. The ADAM program adopted a new
instrument in 2000 in adult booking facilities for male (Part 1) and
female (Part 2) arrestees. Data from arrestees in juvenile detention
facilities (Part 3) continued to use the juvenile instrument from
previous years, extending back through the DRUG USE FORECASTING series
(ICPSR 9477). The ADAM program in 2002 also continued the use of
probability-based sampling for male arrestees in adult facilities, which
was initiated in 2000. Therefore, the male adult sample includes
weights, generated through post-sampling stratification of the data. For
the adult files, variables fell into one of eight categories: (1)
demographic data on each arrestee, (2) ADAM facesheet (records-based)
data, (3) data on disposition of the case, including accession to a
verbal consent script, (4) calendar of admissions to substance abuse and
mental health treatment programs, (5) data on alcohol and drug use,
abuse, and dependence, (6) drug acquisition data covering the five most
commonly used illicit drugs, (7) urine test results, and (8) weights.
The juvenile file contains demographic variables and arrestee's
self-reported past and continued use of 15 drugs, as well as other
drug-related behaviors.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03815.v1
ADAM/DUF Programicpsralcohol abuseicpsrarrestsicpsrcrime patternsicpsrdemographic characteristicsicpsrdrug dependenceicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug related crimesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug treatmenticpsrdrug useicpsrdrugsicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrtrendsicpsrurinalysisicpsrNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemUnited States Department of Justice. National Institute of JusticeInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)3815Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03815.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR04020MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2004 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR04020MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program in the United States, 2003
[electronic resource]
United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice
2006-03-30Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2004ICPSR4020NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The goal of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program
is to determine the extent and correlates of illicit drug use in the
population of booked arrestees in local areas. Data were collected in
2003 up to four separate times (quarterly) during the year in 39
metropolitan areas in the United States. The ADAM program adopted a new
instrument in 2000 in adult booking facilities for male (Part 1) and
female (Part 2) arrestees. The ADAM program in 2003 also continued the
use of probability-based sampling for male arrestees in adult
facilities, which was initiated in 2000. Therefore, the male adult
sample includes weights, generated through post-sampling stratification
of the data. For the adult male and female files, variables fell into
one of eight categories: (1) demographic data on each arrestee, (2) ADAM
facesheet (records-based) data, (3) data on disposition of the case,
including accession to a verbal consent script, (4) calendar of
admissions to substance abuse and mental health treatment programs, (5)
data on alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence, (6) drug
acquisition data covering the five most commonly used illicit drugs, (7)
urine test results, and (8) for males, weights.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04020.v1
demographic characteristicsicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug related crimesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug treatmenticpsrdrug useicpsrdrugsicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrtrendsicpsrurinalysisicpsrdrug dependenceicpsrADAM/DUF Programicpsralcohol abuseicpsrarrestsicpsrcrime patternsicpsrNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramUnited States Department of Justice. National Institute of JusticeInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)4020Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04020.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR34362MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2013 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR34362MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II in the United States, 2011
[electronic resource]
Dana Hunt
2013-06-13Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2013ICPSR34362NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to ICPSR member institutions.Also available as downloadable files.
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II, 2011, is a collection of interview and bioassay data on over 5000 arrestees in 10 United States counties within 48 hours of their arrest. The collection took place between April 1 and September 30, 2011 and represents the fifth year of ADAM II data collection under the sponsorship of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
The 10 current ADAM II sites are: Atlanta, GA (Fulton County); Charlotte, NC (Mecklenburg County); Chicago, IL (Cook County); Denver, CO (Denver County); Indianapolis, IN (Marion County); Minneapolis, MN (Hennepin County); New York, NY (Borough of Manhattan); Portland, OR (Multnomah County); Sacramento, CA (Sacramento County); and Washington, DC (District of Columbia).
In 2011, 5,051 interviews and 4,412 urine tests were conducted in the 10 ADAM II sites over 14 consecutive days in each of two calendar quarters between April 1 and September 30. The samples across these sites represent 35,459 adult males arrested in the 10 sites during the data collection period. Demographic variables include arrest date and time, gender, date of birth, number and types of offenses, county of arrest, race, education, work status, and language of interview.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34362.v1
criminal historiesicpsrdrug abuseicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug useicpsrimprisonmenticpsrjailsicpsrmental healthicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrurinalysisicpsrADAM/DUF Programicpsrarrest recordsicpsrICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and BehaviorHunt, DanaInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)34362Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34362.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR34821MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2013 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR34821MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II in the United States, 2012 (Restricted Use)
[electronic resource]
Dana Hunt
2013-08-29Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2013ICPSR34821NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to ICPSR member institutions.Also available as downloadable files.
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II, 2012 is a collection of interview and bioassay data provided by over 3000 arrestees from five county sites within the United States. Under the sponsorship of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), the ADAM II program monitors drug use and related behaviors (treatment experiences, housing stability, drug market activity, age at first use, employment, etc.) in a probability based sample of male adult arrestees within 48 hours of their arrest. The five ADAM II sites for 2012 were: Atlanta, GA (Fulton County and the City of Atlanta); Chicago, IL (Cook County); Denver, CO (Denver County); New York, NY (Borough of Manhattan); and Sacramento, CA (Sacramento County). The 2012 survey represents the sixth year of ADAM II and includes data from 1,938 interviews and 1,736 urine tests that were conducted at the five ADAM II sites over a 21-day period, between April 30 and July 29, 2012. The samples from these sites were weighted to represent over 14,000 arrests of adult males in the five counties. ADAM II data include official records, arrestee responses from a 20-minute face-to-face interview, and results from voluntary urine samples which tested for the presence of nine different drugs. Identifying information on the arrestees was not retained or shared with law enforcement. Demographic variables include age, gender, race, arrest date and time, county of arrest, number and type(s) of offense(s), education, work status, and language of interview.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34821.v1
ADAM/DUF Programicpsrarrest recordsicpsrcriminal historiesicpsrdrug abuseicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug useicpsrimprisonmenticpsrjailsicpsrmental healthicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrurinalysisicpsrICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and BehaviorICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramHunt, DanaInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)34821Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34821.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR35169MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2014 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR35169MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II in the United States, 2013 (Restricted Use)
[electronic resource]
Dana Hunt
2014-08-01Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2014ICPSR35169NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to ICPSR member institutions.Also available as downloadable files.
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring II, 2013 is a collection of interview and bioassay data provided by over 3000 arrestees from five county sites within the United States. Under the sponsorship of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), the ADAM II program monitors drug use and related behaviors (treatment experiences, housing stability, drug market activity, age at first use, employment, etc.) in a probability based sample of male adult arrestees within 48 hours of their arrest. The five ADAM II sites for 2013 were: Atlanta, GA (Fulton County and the City of Atlanta); Chicago, IL (Cook County); Denver, CO (Denver County); New York, NY (Borough of Manhattan); and Sacramento, CA (Sacramento County). The 2013 survey represents the seventh year of ADAM II and includes data from 1,900 interviews and 1,681 urine tests that were conducted at the five ADAM II sites over a 21-day period, between May 5, 2013 and July 28, 2013. ADAM II data include official records, arrestee responses from a 20-minute face-to-face interview, and results from voluntary urine samples which tested for the presence of nine different drugs. Identifying information on the arrestees was not retained or shared with law enforcement. Demographic variables include age, gender, race, citizenship, marital status, arrest date and time, county of arrest, number and type(s) of offense(s), education, work status, and language of interview.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35169.v1
ADAM/DUF Programicpsrarrest recordsicpsrarrestsicpsrcriminal historiesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug useicpsrimprisonmenticpsrjailsicpsrmental healthicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrurinalysisicpsrICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and BehaviorNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemHunt, DanaInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)35169Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35169.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR25821MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2009 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR25821MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program II in the United States, 2007
[electronic resource]
Dana Hunt
2010-01-28Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2009ICPSR25821NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) II program was designed to monitor trends in drug use among arrested populations in key urban areas across the United States. The first ADAM data collection was instituted in 2000 as a replacement for the Drug Use Forecasting program (DUF), which employed a non-scientific sampling procedure to select primarily felony arrestees in 23 urban areas throughout the country. The year 2000 revision of ADAM instituted a representative sampling strategy among booked male arrestees in an expanded network of 35 sites. The program was suspended by the National Institute of Justice in 2003 and restarted in 2007 with funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). With ADAM II, the ONDCP and Abt Associates have initiated a new data collection that replicates the ADAM methodology in order to obtain data comparable to previously established trends. ADAM II implemented two quarters of data collection in ten sentinel ADAM sites to revive monitoring drug trends, with a particular focus on obtaining valid and reliable information on methamphetamine use. A total of 8,296 arrestees were interviewed during the second and third quarters of 2007. Participation was voluntary and confidential, and the procedures included a personal interview (lasting approximately 20 minutes) and collection of a urine specimen. The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) II survey collected data about drug use, drug and alcohol dependency and treatment, and drug market participation among booked male arrestees within 48 hours of arrest. Demographic variables include age, race, most serious charge, date of arrest, time of arrest, and education level. The data also include whether the provided urine specimen was positive for several drugs including marijuana, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamines, and barbiturates.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25821.v2
ADAM/DUF Programicpsraddictionicpsralcoholismicpsrcocaineicpsrdrug abuseicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug useicpsrheroinicpsrmarijuanaicpsrmethamphetamineicpsrurinalysisicpsrNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemHunt, DanaInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)25821Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR25821.v2 nmm 22 4500ICPSR27221MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2010 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR27221MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program II in the United States, 2008
[electronic resource]
Dana Hunt
,
William Rhodes
2010-03-31Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2010ICPSR27221NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM II) program was designed to monitor trends in drug use among arrested populations in key urban areas across the United States. The first ADAM data collection was instituted in 2000 as a replacement for the Drug Use Forecasting program (DUF), which employed a non-scientific sampling procedure to select primarily felony arrestees in 23 urban areas throughout the country. The year 2000 revision of ADAM instituted a representative sampling strategy among booked male arrestees in an expanded network of 35 sites. The program was suspended by the National Institute of Justice in 2003 and restarted in 2007 with funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). With ADAM II, ONDCP and its contractor, Abt Associates Inc. have initiated a new data collection that replicates the ADAM methodology in order to obtain data comparable to previously established trends. ADAM II implements two quarters of data collection in ten sentinel ADAM sites to revive monitoring drug trends, with a particular focus on obtaining valid and reliable information on methamphetamine use. Representing minimal adjustments to the previously employed ADAM survey, the ADAM II survey collects data about drug use, drug and alcohol dependency and treatment, and drug market participation among booked male arrestees within 48 hours of arrest. Data collection has been conducted across two back-to-back quarters in each of 10 counties from a county-based representative sample of 250 male arrestees per quarter for a total of 500 arrestees annually per site or a total of 5,000 arrestees across sites annually. A total of 7,717 arrestees were interviewed during the second and third quarters of 2008. Collection occurs in two cycles in booking facilities at each site to provide estimates for two calendar quarters each year. Data in this file were collected beginning April 1, 2007 and ending March 31, 2008. Additional data collection periods were optioned by ONDCP, and subsequent cycles of back-to-back data collection (not yet available) began April 1, 2008. Participation is voluntary and confidential, and the procedures include a personal interview (lasting approximately 20 minutes) and collection of a urine specimen. Demographic variables include age, race, most serious charge, date of arrest, time of arrest, and education level. The data also include whether the provided urine specimen was positive for several drugs including marijuana, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamines, and barbiturates.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27221.v1
addictionicpsralcoholismicpsrcocaineicpsrdrug abuseicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug useicpsrheroinicpsrmarijuanaicpsrADAM/DUF ProgramicpsrmethamphetamineicpsrurinalysisicpsrICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeHunt, DanaRhodes, WilliamInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)27221Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR27221.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR30061MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2011 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR30061MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program II in the United States, 2009
[electronic resource]
Dana Hunt
,
William Rhodes
2011-02-24Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2011ICPSR30061NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM II) program was designed to monitor trends in drug use among arrested populations in key urban areas across the United States. The first ADAM data collection was instituted in 2000 as a replacement for the Drug Use Forecasting program (DUF), which employed a non-scientific sampling procedure to select primarily felony arrestees in 23 urban areas throughout the country. The year 2000 revision of ADAM instituted a representative sampling strategy among booked male arrestees in an expanded network of 35 sites. The program was suspended by the National Institute of Justice in 2003 and restarted in 2007 with funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). With ADAM II, ONDCP and its contractor, Abt Associates Inc., initiated a new data collection that replicated the ADAM methodology in order to obtain data comparable to previously established trends. ADAM II implemented two quarters of data collection in ten sentinel ADAM sites to revive monitoring drug trends, with a particular focus on obtaining valid and reliable information on methamphetamine use. Representing minimal adjustments to the previously employed ADAM survey, the ADAM II survey collected data about drug use, drug and alcohol dependency and treatment, and drug market participation among booked male arrestees within 48 hours of arrest. A total of 7,794 arrestees were interviewed during the second and third quarters of 2009. Collection occurred in two cycles in booking facilities at each site to provide estimates for two calendar quarters each year. Data in this file were collected beginning April 1, 2009, and ending September 30, 2009. Participation was voluntary and confidential, and the procedures included a personal interview (lasting approximately 20 minutes) and collection of a urine specimen. Demographic variables include age, race, most serious charge, date of arrest, time of arrest, and education level. The data also include whether the provided urine specimen was positive for several drugs including marijuana, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamines, and barbiturates.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR30061.v1
ADAM/DUF Programicpsralcohol abuseicpsrarrestsicpsrcrime patternsicpsrdemographic characteristicsicpsrdrug abuseicpsrdrug dependenceicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug related crimesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug treatmenticpsrdrug useicpsrdrugsicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrtrendsicpsrurinalysisicpsrNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemHunt, Dana Rhodes, WilliamInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)30061Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR30061.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR32321MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2011 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR32321MiAaIMiAaI
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program II in the United States, 2010
[electronic resource]
Dana Hunt
,
William Rhodes
2011-11-04Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2011ICPSR32321NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM II) program was designed to monitor trends in drug use among arrested populations in key urban areas across the United States. The first ADAM data collection was instituted in 2000 as a replacement for the Drug Use Forecasting program (DUF), which employed a non-scientific sampling procedure to select primarily felony arrestees in 23 urban areas throughout the country. The year 2000 revision of ADAM instituted a representative sampling strategy among booked male arrestees in an expanded network of 35 sites. The program was suspended by the National Institute of Justice in 2003 and restarted in 2007 with funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). With ADAM II, ONDCP and its contractor, Abt Associates Inc., initiated a new data collection that replicated the ADAM methodology in order to obtain data comparable to previously established trends. ADAM II implemented two quarters of data collection in ten sentinel ADAM sites to revive monitoring drug trends, with a particular focus on obtaining valid and reliable information on methamphetamine use. Representing minimal adjustments to the previously employed ADAM survey, the ADAM II survey collected data about drug use, drug and alcohol dependency and treatment, and drug market participation among booked male arrestees within 48 hours of arrest. A total of 8,332 arrestees were interviewed during the second and third quarters of 2010. Collection occurred in two cycles in booking facilities at each site to provide estimates for two calendar quarters each year. Data in this file were collected beginning April 1, 2010, and ending September 30, 2010. Participation was voluntary and confidential, and the procedures included a personal interview (lasting approximately 20 minutes) and collection of a urine specimen. Demographic variables include age, race, most serious charge, date of arrest, time of arrest, and education level. The data also include whether the provided urine specimen was positive for several drugs including marijuana, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamines, and barbiturates.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR32321.v1
ADAM/DUF Programicpsralcohol abuseicpsrarrestsicpsrcrime patternsicpsrdemographic characteristicsicpsrdrug abuseicpsrdrug dependenceicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug related crimesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug treatmenticpsrdrug useicpsrdrugsicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrtrendsicpsrurinalysisicpsrICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramHunt, DanaRhodes, WilliamInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)32321Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR32321.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR02564MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2000 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR02564MiAaIMiAaI
Crack, Powder Cocaine, and Heroin
[electronic resource] Drug Purchase and Use Patterns in Six Cities in the United States, 1995-1996
K. Jack Riley
2012-08-22Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2000ICPSR2564NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
This study was designed to address the practical and policy
implications of various drug market participation patterns. In 1995,
the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and the National
Institute of Justice (NIJ) collaborated on a project called the
Procurement Study. This study was executed as an addendum to NIJ's
Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program (DRUG USE FORECASTING IN 24 CITIES
IN THE UNITED STATES, 1987-1997 [ICPSR 9477]) with the goal of
extending previous research in which heroin users were interviewed on
various aspects of drug market activity. The present study sought to
explore additional features of drug market participation and use, both
within and across drug types and cities, and included two additional
drugs -- powder cocaine and crack cocaine. Data were collected from
recently arrested users of powder cocaine, crack cocaine, and heroin
in six DUF cities (Chicago, New York, Portland, San Diego, San
Antonio, and Washington, DC). Each of the three files in this
collection, Crack Data (Part 1), Heroin Data (Part 2), and Powder
Cocaine Data (Part 3), is comprised of data from a procurement
interview, urine test variables, and a DUF interview. During the
procurement interview, information was collected on purchase and use
patterns for specific drugs. Variables from the procurement interview
include the respondent's method of using the drug, the term used to
refer to the drug, whether the respondent bought the drug in the
neighborhood, the number of different dealers the respondent bought
the drug from, how the respondent made the connection with the dealer
(i.e., street, house, phone, beeper, business/store, or friends),
their main drug source, whether the respondent went to someone else if
the source was not available, how the respondent coped with not being
able to find drugs to buy, whether the respondent got the drug for
free, the means by which the respondent obtained money, the quantity
and packaging of the drug, and the number of minutes spent searching
for, traveling to, and waiting for their last purchase. Urine tests
screened for the presence of ten drugs, including marijuana, opiates,
cocaine, PCP, methadone, benzodiazepines (Valium), methaqualone,
propoxyphene (Darvon), barbiturates, and amphetamines (positive test
results for amphetamines were confirmed by gas chromatography). Data
from the DUF interview provide detailed information about each
arrestee's self-reported use of 15 drugs. For each drug type,
arrestees were asked whether they had ever used the drug, the age at
which they first used the drug, whether they had used the drug within
the past three days, how many days they had used the drug within the
past month, whether they had ever needed or felt dependent on the
drug, and whether they were dependent on the drug at the time of the
interview. Data from the DUF interview instrument also included
alcohol/drug treatment history, information about whether arrestees
had ever injected drugs, and whether they were influenced by drugs
when the crime that they were charged with was committed. The data
also include information about whether the arrestee had been to an
emergency room for drug-related incidents and whether he or she had
had prior arrests in the past 12 months. Demographic data include the
age, race, sex, educational attainment, marital status, employment
status, and living circumstances of each respondent.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02564.v1
ADAM/DUF Programicpsrarrestsicpsrcocaineicpsrcrack cocaineicpsrcrime patternsicpsrdemographic characteristicsicpsrdrug abuseicpsrdrug dependenceicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug related crimesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug trafficicpsrdrug treatmenticpsrdrug useicpsrdrugsicpsrheroinicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrtrendsicpsrurinalysisicpsrICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeRiley, K. JackInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)2564Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR02564.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR09979MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s1993 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR09979MiAaIMiAaI
Drug Abuse as a Predictor of Rearrest or Failure to Appear in Court in New York City, 1984
[electronic resource]
Eric D. Wish
2000-04-18Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]1993ICPSR9979NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
This data collection was undertaken to estimate the
prevalence of drug use/drug use trends among booked arrestees in New
York City and to analyze the relationship between drug use and crime.
The data, which were collected over a six-month period, were generated
from volunteer interviews with male arrestees, the analyses of their
urine specimens, police and court records of prior criminal behavior
and experience with the criminal justice system, and records of each
arrestee's current case, including court warrants, rearrests, failures
to appear, and court dispositions. Demographic variables include age,
education, vocational training, marital status, residence, and
employment. Items relating to prior and current drug use and drug
dependency are provided, along with results from urinalysis tests for
opiates, cocaine, PCP, and methadone. The collection also contains
arrest data for index crimes and subsequent court records pertaining
to those arrests (number of court warrants issued, number of pretrial
rearrests, types of rearrests, failure to appear in court, and court
dispositions), and prior criminal records (number of times arrested
and convicted for certain offenses).
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09979.v1
drug related crimesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug useicpsrpolice recordsicpsrrecidivism predictionicpsrurinalysisicpsrarrest recordsicpsrcourt casesicpsrcriminal historiesicpsrdisposition (legal)icpsrdrug abuseicpsrNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemWish, Eric D.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)9979Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09979.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR03604MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2003 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR03604MiAaIMiAaI
Modeling Impacts of Policing Initiatives on Drug and Criminal Careers of Arrestees in New York City, New York, 1999
[electronic resource]
Bruce D. Johnson
,
Andrew Golub
2006-03-30Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2003ICPSR3604NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
This study sought to understand the accuracy and validity
of arrestee self-reports of drug use and the overall contact of
arrestees with the criminal justice system, with a secondary focus on
how arrestee self-reports of drug use correspond to urinalysis
results. Moreover, this study investigated whether arrestees were
aware of the New York City Police Department's Quality-of-Life (QOL)
policing efforts and whether they had changed their criminal behavior
as a result. A QOL Policing Supplement, designed to explore new means
of evaluating police behavior, was administered to all adult arrestees
in the five boroughs of New York City (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan,
Staten Island, and Queens) who had completed an Arrestee Drug Abuse
Monitoring (ADAM) program interview, provided a urine specimen, and
were willing to answer additional questions concerning QOL policing.
Part 1, Policing Study Data, is a large integrated dataset containing
all of the variables derived from the 1999 ADAM interviews, the
Policing Supplement instrument, and administrative records data from
the Criminal Justice Agency (CJA) and the New York State Division of
Criminal Justice Services. This dataset is linked, via an anonymous
case number, to Part 2, Arrestee Criminal History Data, which contains
each arrestee's official criminal history.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03604.v1
arrest recordsicpsrcareer criminalsicpsrcriminal historiesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug useicpsrurinalysisicpsrNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemNACJD IX. PoliceJohnson, Bruce D.Golub, AndrewInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)3604Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03604.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR33201MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2012 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR33201MiAaIMiAaI
Monitoring Drug Epidemics and the Markets That Sustain Them, Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) and ADAM II Data, 2000-2003 and 2007-2010
[electronic resource]
Andrew Golub
,
Henry H. Brownstein
,
Eloise Dunlap
2012-12-13Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2012ICPSR33201NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
This study examined trends in the use of five widely abused drugs among arrestees at 10 geographically diverse locations from 2000 to 2010: Atlanta, Charlotte, Chicago, Denver, Indianapolis, Manhattan, Minneapolis, Portland Oregon, Sacramento, and Washington DC. The data came from the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program reintroduced in 2007 (ADAM II) and its predecessor the ADAM program. ADAM data included urinalysis results that provided an objective measure of recent drug use, provided location specific estimates over time, and provided sample weights that yielded unbiased estimates for each location. The ADAM data were analyzed according to a drug epidemics framework, which has been previously employed to understand the decline of the crack epidemic, the growth of marijuana use in the 1990s, and the persistence of heroin use. Similar to other diffusion of innovation processes, drug epidemics tend to follow a natural course passing through four distinct phases: incubation, expansion, plateau, and decline. The study also searched for changes in drug markets over the course of a drug epidemic.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR33201.v1
ADAM/DUF Programicpsrarrestsicpsrcocaineicpsrcrack cocaineicpsrcrime patternsicpsrdrug abuseicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug related crimesicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug treatmenticpsrdrug useicpsrheroinicpsrmarijuanaicpsrmethamphetamineicpsrtrendsicpsrurinalysisicpsrNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemGolub, AndrewBrownstein, Henry H.Dunlap, EloiseInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)33201Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR33201.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR22381MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150303s2009 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR22381MiAaIMiAaI
Monitoring Drug Markets in Manhattan [New York City], With the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program, 1998-2002
[electronic resource]
Andrew Golub
,
Bruce D. Johnson
2009-06-03Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2009ICPSR22381NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-03-03.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The purpose of the study was to determine how much Manhattan (New York City) arrestees surveyed by the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program spend on drug expenses. The program obtained both self-report and urinalysis data from a total of 5,210 Manhattan arrestees surveyed by the ADAM program from 1998 to 2002. The principal investigators developed a formula for an episodic estimator of a respondent's drug expense for cash, noncash, and cash-combination transactions. The dataset contains a total of 267 variables relating to Manhattan arrestees' demographics, interview information, criminal history, urinalysis test results, drug use, drug market transactions, and drug expenses.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR22381.v1
ADAM/DUF Programicpsrdrug testingicpsrdrug treatmenticpsrdrug useicpsrdrugsicpsrsubstance abuseicpsrtrendsicpsrurinalysisicpsralcohol abuseicpsrarrestsicpsrcrime patternsicpsrcriminal historiesicpsrdemographic characteristicsicpsrdrug law offensesicpsrdrug offendersicpsrdrug related crimesicpsrNACJD XI. Drugs, Alcohol, and CrimeICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramGolub, AndrewJohnson, Bruce D.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)22381Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR22381.v1